Time to buckle our swash!

[Ceaon]

If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.


Armor check penalty: -1

I always felt this was stupid. Fighting with a rapier, buckler and your finesse is a very standard fighting style (or at least it was), prevalent in both history and fantasy. Why is it penalized in D&D 3.5?

[Linkscoolfriend]

No idea. But a masterwork buckler removes the penalty. Could attribute that to standard bucklers being made of iron and bulky, thus the penalty, and MW ones being finely crafted, like the blade of the rapier this obviously well dressed man (or woman) is wielding.

[Gandariel]

Fighting with a rapier, buckler and your finesse is a very standard fighting style (or at least it was), prevalent in both history and fantasy. Why is it penalized in D&D 3.5?

because... it has never been prevalent?

When people went to war, they would wear full armor and a big sword/shield.
The thing you're imagining, fencing, was like what it is now. Just a sport. Only, more dangerous.

a fencer, against a guy in fullplate and greatsword, would die instantly.
So yeah, fencing was designed to be a fight between two people with the same, non optimal, equipment (rapier and no armor)

[Gavinfoxx]

Actually, fighting with Rapier and Buckler was pretty good at the time for most any civilian self defense scenario, against people who could approach you in the street with whatever weapons they could manage to get into a city...

[Gandariel]

Actually, fighting with Rapier and Buckler was pretty good at the time for most any civilian self defense scenario, against people who could approach you in the street with whatever weapons they could manage to get into a city...

Yes, a rapier is better than a club or a dagger in a fight.

And your point is..?

[Gavinfoxx]

Yes, a rapier is better than a club or a dagger in a fight.

And your point is..?

That it is a useful fighting style, and it's not necessarily just or dueling against identical equipment, and that it's reasonable, in a fantasy setting, to increase the utility of a particular fighting style to work against foes and situations and fighting styles that it wouldn't, historically, work against?

[Knaight]

because... it has never been prevalent?

When people went to war, they would wear full armor and a big sword/shield.
The thing you're imagining, fencing, was like what it is now. Just a sport. Only, more dangerous.

...

So yeah, fencing was designed to be a fight between two people with the same, non optimal, equipment (rapier and no armor)
Hardly. First off, it wasn't a sport as much as a civilian street fighting scenario, which meant that there were certain safe assumptions. For one, nobody was going to have meaningful armor, which is what allowed the use of rapiers, smallswords, et. all in the first place. Secondly, all weapons that were going to be used had to be things that could reasonably be worn, which cuts out most larger weapons. Under those parameters the rapier is a good and usable weapon, as is the small sword. Moreover, picking up a buckler was not going to somehow disadvantage you - you want to use both your hands, and a buckler is a very effective tool for manipulating your opponents weapon, to the point where the person with it has a fairly major advantage over the person without it.

Now, against actual battlefield equipment the civilian street fighting stuff was near worthless. Armor alone drastically reduces the utility of a rapier, and there are weapons that are faster, more maneuverable, and have longer reach. The "greatsword" you listed was one of them, another is the two handed spear.